Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
20
Secretariat:
International Food Policy Research Institute
2033 K Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006 U.S.A.
OCTOBER 2001
CAPRi Working Papers contain preliminary material and research results, and are circulated
prior to a full peer review in order to stimulate discussion and critical comment. It is expected that most
Working Papers will eventually be published in some other form, and that their content may also be revised
ABSTRACT
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction..................................................................................................................... 1
6. Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 28
References ......................................................................................................................... 31
ii
COLLECTIVE ACTION FOR WATER HARVESTING IRRIGATION
IN THE LERMA-CHAPALA BASIN, MEXICO
1. INTRODUCTION
climatic, social and economic contexts (Oweis et al. 1999; Agarwal and Narain 1997;
Scott 1994). Given their dispersed nature, relatively small size and suitability under
resource-poor conditions, WHI are not likely to attract significant external support or
imposed management, but they do offer considerable potential for poverty eradication
While some WHI systems in developing countries may be built and operated by
individual landowners, the level of land, labor, capital and “representational” resources
that must be mobilized for constructing, maintaining, and managing such WHI systems
requires a high degree of collective action. Further, because WHI functions in a larger
watershed context, which includes land, forests, and other resources along with water for
multiple purposes including irrigation, these systems are often managed as common
1
Principal Researcher, International Water Management Institute, c.scott@cgiar.org
2
M.Sc. candidate, International Institute for Infrastructural, Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering,
polsil@hotmail.com
3
By water harvesting, we refer to the capture, diversion, storage and subsequent use of surface runoff
generated in watersheds. By this definition, the watershed as a unit is considered to include both the
upstream catchment and downstream use of water.
2
environmental factors, but also on effective institutions to mobilize labor and other
are both specific to the resource and users group (water scarcity, social stratification, and
organization) and generic to the larger context in which these are embedded (water
intended to supplement rainfall, the WHI strategy may simply be to avert total crop
failure. On the other hand, where irrigation is intended to be the primary water supply to
the crop (particularly in dry season cultivation), water must be allocated to ensure greater
crop productivity. Both strategies may apply in the same WHI system in different
seasons. Nevertheless, each requires a distinct set of water allocation and distribution
rules or agreements that are conditioned by the social and economic contexts in which
WHI operates.
and property rights systems (Place and Swallow 2000) and labor constraints that may
limit the time individuals or households are able to spend on management of collective
resources. Social, class and gender dynamics also clearly mediate access to these
resources and fundamentally shape the rules and conventions that determine water
Many farmer- managed irrigation systems have been in operation for centuries
(and have been the subject of study for decades—see Ostrom 1992; Wade 1994).
However, the survival of such systems is challenged by changing property rights regimes,
livelihood strategies, and growing scarcity and competition over water resources. In
3
Mexico, the ejidos that have held land and water resources as common property since the
1930s are undergoing major reforms that will weaken their collective control over
common property management where the resource is central to their survival (Baland and
Platteau 1996; Wade 1994), which would imply that diversification of incomes out of
agriculture would decrease the level of involvement in WHI. While increasing water
different groups from a basin into greater contact with each other and calls for greater
negotiations or interaction over water supplies. In this paper, we examine how these
factors affect management in two WHI systems in the Lerma-Chapala Basin in Mexico.
In the context of water-scarce river basins where demand for water exceeds
supply and “closed basins” where there is no outflow of water that is not already
committed to downstream uses (often with pre-established rights), there are clear
water increases downstream, political and economic pressure may be brought to bear in
an attempt to limit upstream water use. As a result, water use must be assessed from a
agricultural, urban, industrial, and environmental uses. Because WHI systems are
invariably small and dispersed, they are often overlooked in basin- level water allocation
agreements. However, as rising demand in the face of constant supply drives river basins
increasingly toward “closure,” there will no doubt be increasing attention paid to water
4
River basin-level assessments of water use account for recycling and reuse, unlike system-level
assessments, which view these as “losses”. This approach is presented in greater depth by Seckler (1996)
and Molden (1997).
4
The central issue addressed in the paper is the impact of external economic and
water resource policy changes on collective action in water scarce WHI systems, as
27 of the Mexican Constitution to allow sale and transfer of ejido land, combined with
falling grain prices resulting from the implementation of the North American Free Trade
Agreement (NAFTA), have fundamentally changed the basic conditions under which
agriculture and water resources are managed in Mexico. Ejidos’ collective management
of land, water and other watershed resources will increasingly pass to private, individual
hands. Further, competition for scarce water implies a larger set of basin- wide tradeoffs
with bans being placed on new water harvesting impoundments and increased attention
being paid to water management at the WHI system level. Such external factors will tend
to move ejidos towards watershed resource use with higher productivity, particularly of
irrigation water. Paradoxically, some of the very changes that challenge current
collective resource management may provide the opportunities for the transition to higher
productivity, specifically off- farm income flows and migrants’ newly acquired farming
expertise.
with limited external support account for over 14% of Mexico’s irrigated area (CNA
although there is considerable variability by water source, crop type, land tenure, etc.
Farmer- managed irrigation demonstrates high average productivity despite the policy and
investment emphasis on the latter. In surface water harvesting systems in the Lerma-
Chapala Basin study area (see below), the cropping pattern is predominantly maize,
sorghum, wheat, and barley for grain (with stover used as forage), and garbanzo.
The institutional arrangements devised by farmers and water users to manage the
water captured in upland watersheds range from collective rules for access to common
of water harvesting systems in Mexico are the low financial cost of water and their
flexibility in adapting irrigation operation to users’ needs, allowing for the pursuit of off-
farm economic activities with important gender implications. Recent policy changes in
coupled with increasing water competition pose significant challenges to the future
property management in Mexico in general, and WHI systems in specific, have shown
considerable resilience to external forces in the past, and it is clear that the y are in the
process of adapting to the current set of pressures. A brief historical overview of water
5
Ejidos are agrarian communities in Mexico, established beginning in the 1930s, in which land and water
resources are held as common property with private usufruct rights.
6
suggest that runoff was captured, stored, diverted, and otherwise conveyed to irrigate
settled agricultural land in the Teohuacán valley, for instance, not long after maize was
first domesticated there between 5000 and 3500 B.C. (Hernández 1998). Additiona lly,
filtration galleries (similar to the Middle Eastern qanats) were constructed to use
groundwater. In both cases, the link between water and the watershed hinterlands that
Mexico, particularly for irrigation. The historical evidence suggests that residual
moisture cultivation on seasonally receding lakebeds was practiced where salinity did not
innovations included river diversions and seasonal storage ponds (jagüeyes) around
which human settlements formed. Additionally, the harvesting of ephemeral runoff flows
generated in small watersheds during the rainy season and stored in earthen or masonry
structures allowed for dry season irrigation. Little is known about the internal water
allocation and distribution practices adopted for these small watershed water harvesting
systems.
6
The atl-tépetl (water-mountain) duality figured prominently in the cosmology of the Mexica and other
Mesoamerican people.
7
The chinampas of Xochimilco in the Valley of Mexico present an innovative water management solution
to cultivation in the shallow lakes. Organic matter dredged from canals was continually applied to the
fields, raising their level above the lake and allowing adequate drainage and salt removal in addition to
taking advantage of intensive nutrient recycling.
7
While early Spanish colonization imposed new forms of surplus extraction and
harvesting systems permitted them to continue their own local practices. However, as
mining gained importance and soon came to dominate the colonial economy, i.e., by the
early 17th Century, surplus food production again became an imperative. Indigenous
water harvesting systems were supplanted, enlarged, or entirely redone with hybrid
agricultural land were abandoned with the advent of tubewell irrigation in the past several
decades; however, this may reflect modern farmers’ ignorance of their original function
as residual moisture cultivation systems (Eling and Sánchez 2000) as opposed to the
seasonal runoff or river baseflow generated in upland areas of the watersheds in which
they were located. The scale of these systems allowed for irrigation-watershed
integration of resources and social relations, given that irrigation water users (whether in
small rural communities or the large haciendas) were invariably the users of other
watershed resources, including forest produce, timber, firewood, and importantly pasture
and range for livestock (abrevaderos). Many of the smaller water harvesting systems in
the upper watersheds, in fact, were expressly built to provide water for livestock.
8
The colonization of New Spain followed the Inquisition with the expulsion and voluntary migration of
the Moors from the Iberian Peninsula, in many cases, to the colonies. Masonry stone work from this
period in Mexico shows clear Islamic influence and the case has been made that construction practices
and technologies also bear this influence (see Sánchez-Rodríguez 2000).
8
In other cases, however, irrigation was reserved for the haciendas, with effective
exclusion of campesinos, which were forced to rely on rainfed agriculture and livestock.
As water use intensified in the lower watersheds, in contrast to extensive use of upper
expropriation of communal lands; however, hacienda control over land and water was
not fully broken until Cárdenas’ agrarian reforms of the 1930s and the establishment of
the ejidos or land reform communities. These developments are important precursors of
present day systems of communal management of watershed resources and warrant some
additional discussion.
Land was titled to the ejido, the legal body of the entire community represented
by a general assembly and elected leaders. Individual ejidatarios only held usufruct
rights, although these tended to be stable and could be transferred among generations
within the same family. Sale or transfer of usufruct outside the ejido was illegal,
engendering strong community control over both agricultural land and extensive range
for livestock. Water rights in Mexico are legally tied to land (Kloezen 1999)—directly in
the case of surface water, and implicitly though less directly for groundwater. As a
The 1940s and 1950s saw the consolidation of ejido management of common
property resources, including surface water harvesting systems in Mexico. At the same
time, private interests were gaining increasing control over groundwater resources
(Wester, et al. 1999), paralleling trends observed in other countries with important
irrigation sectors (Shah 1993). The benefits of private and public investment in
9
while ‘traditional’ irrigation systems (including large surface storage dams, but also
importantly for the analyses presented in this paper, the small water harvesting systems)
are more the purview of the ejido sector (Palerm-Viqueira 2000). While there is still
significant participation of private interests in the large public irrigation districts, WHI
systems are predominantly managed by ejido users, with limited government support or
intervention.
with its own water source, internal set of water allocation and distribution rules, and
programs and exogenous demands (either competing or complementary) for water and
other resources.
Two defining and interrelated characteristics of the unidades are the equity of
access to irrigation and the low costs of water (in financial, but not necessarily labor,
terms). Equitable water allocation stems from the communal management of resources
implicit in the ejido model of agrarian organization. The low financial cost of water in
WHI systems is a product of simple technologies using local expertise and materials.
resources for repairs when systems break down. The capacity of communities to come
together for ongoing activities as well as crises determines the sustainability of WHI.
complexity of internal water management tasks (Dayton-Johnson 1999) and by the need
for liaison with external parties, particularly where conflict threatens access to water as
will be shown in one of the cases studied. Community organizations for WHI
develop separately from them, with implications for their effectiveness in managing
processes internal and external to the WHI system. We contend that the effectiveness of
depends on how able they are to focus on specific, internal water management tasks.
and subsequent sale of ejido land, ostensibly to provide ejidatarios with the same
competitive advantage as the private farmers in terms of access to credit and investment.
processes under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The adaptive
response of ejidos has been mixed (Snyder 1999; De Janvry et al. 1997) in terms of their
ability to diversify and intensify production in the face of the NAFTA challenge. Falling
prices of basic grains (maize, sorghum, and wheat) because of cheap imports from the
U.S. and Canada have reduced ejido farmers’ returns—although prices for the preferred
11
local maize for tortillas have not fallen proportionally—and increased the need for crop
diversification. At the same time, vegetable production is highly risky for newcomers,
both as a result of agronomic factors, pest control, etc. as well as marketing challenges.
individual ejidatarios are entering contract-farming arrangements (with their own share
of risks). The structural changes brought about under NAFTA and the response of
Mexican farmers—both ejidos and others—will have profound impacts on land and water
where labor is the household resource whose allocation must be optimized (Buechler
financial resources. Further, the periodic resource mobilization required in WHI systems,
for instance to reconstruct damaged diversions or canals, increases the labor costs for
access to water. Where farmers have access to off- farm income sources, including
considerable male seasonal or permanent migration, WHI systems have had to evolve
young men seeking employment in the United States in significantly greater numbers
than women, existing ejido management of water has tended to exclude women from
formal decision- making (Buechler 2000). Significant numbers of women are water users,
and WHI in this context calls for strategies that afford women greater access to irrigation.
The flexibility of irrigation operations, including the ability to trade or rent turns, is
The remainder of this paper looks at the strategies of two systems for managing
the resources and maintaining the necessary collective action. While both are in a closed
basin with competition for water, Trojes de Paul has more storage capacity and irrigated
area per user, but fewer alternative livelihood options, while Nápoles faces more external
competition for water but more alternative sources of income, so that irrigated production
The Lerma-Chapala basin in Mexico (see Figure 1) has total consumptive water
demands that significantly exceed average water supply (de Anda et al. 1998). The
55,511 km2 basin (including two adjacent closed basins) covers five states and is the
source of water for 15 million people (11 million within the basin, and 2 million each in
Mexico City and Guadalajara). The Lerma River rises on the slopes of the Toluca
volcano and flows over 500 km through forest, rich farmland, urban areas, and semi-arid
scrubland before emptying into Lake Chapala, Mexico’s largest freshwater lake. When
storage volumes in the lake permit, controlled outflows are passed to the Santiago River
Lerma-Chapala Basin
showing location of water harvesting irrigation (WHI) systems
studied
N
0 50 100 km
Mexico
Elevation (m)
Nápoles 3200
WHI system
León
Laja
Trojes de Paul
WHI system
rampant competition and rapid depletion, and water quality is a major concern. Lake
Chapala, the receiving waters of the basin, reflects the cumulative impacts of upstream
water resources development. The irrigated area in the basin grew from around 200,000
ha in the 1950s to 800,000 ha in the 1980s (Wester et al. 1999), which coupled with a
declining trend in rainfall, has resulted in decreased Lerma River inflows to the lake and
dramatic decreases in the volume stored. Two low storage periods (in the mid-1950s and
14
1999-2000) characterize the lake’s behavior since 1934 when systematic data collection
began—. Average inflows of the Lerma River were significantly higher in the 1950s
than they are now (de Anda 1998) and the lake recuperated to full storage in 1959. Given
the present over-exploitation of groundwater throughout the basin and the development
of surface water in the upper sub-basins, it is unlikely that the lake will recover witho ut
In 1989 the federal government and the governments of the five states in the basin
signed an historic agreement that adopted four main objectives to improve water
1. control and regulate surface water use and distribute water fairly among users
2. improve water quality
3. increase water-use efficiency
4. conserve the river basin ecosystem
In pursuit of the first objective, a surface water allocation agreement was signed
increase runoff flows to the lake. Nevertheless, the installed capacity of minor water
storage systems not inventoried by basin authorities (CNA 1999) accounts for 27% of all
constructed surface water storage volume, not including lakes (Scott and Flores-López,
manuscript in preparation). Remote sensing imagery from the Oct.-Nov. 1998 period
when surface storage systems were full, coupled with digital terrain analysis, indicated
that minor storage exceeds 700 million m3 (MCM). A total of 28,895 water harvesting
reservoirs each smaller than 2.5 MCM (the threshold definition for large reservoirs) hold
a combined 314 MCM, or 11% of the constructed storage in the basin. Clearly, a
15
Although the smallest water harvesting systems are for livestock rather than irrigation,
there are nevertheless over 800 small reservoirs each capable of irrigating at least 5 ha of
land. The total irrigable area under these WHI systems is 34,000 ha, assuming typical
cropping patterns under irrigation efficiencies of 50%. Thus the impact of WHI systems
expressed interest and concern over the preliminary results presented above.
irrigation and the management of the Lerma-Chapala Basin, field research was
undertaken in 25 unidades with eight developed as detailed case studies covering a range
of social, institutional and water resources issues (Silva-Ochoa et al. 2000). For this
paper, we present and analyze field data on the only two systems among the eight that
rely on surface water harvesting—Trojes de Paul and Nápoles (see Figure 1). These
systems were selected as representative of WHI systems in the Lerma-Chapala Basin and
have comparable numbers of users, irrigable land and cropping patterns. Given the
difference in water availability between the two, we expected that water allocation would
differ. Further, their location relative to urban employment opportunities suggested some
differences in livelihood strategies. However, similar levels and type of collective action
around WHI and other watershed resources were expected in both systems, given the
need to keep the systems functioning in the face of external changes. It should be noted
that since the field study was completed, land in both ejidos has been titled to the
16
respective ejidatario (or ejidataria) operators. 9 The general characteristics of the two
Trojes de Paul is the largest water harvesting system in the watershed it shares
with El Sauz and El Colorado WHI systems (Figure 2). The Trojes reservoir has
significantly greater storage capacity (per ha irrigated and per user) than Nápoles (see
Table 1). As a result, from the users’ perspective, this system is less water scarce than
Nápoles and permits a higher degree of flexibility in irrigation distribution and operation.
9
Except for minor inconsistencies in parcel boundaries in Trojes de Paul, land in both ejidos has been
titled (Ing. José Ramírez, Registro Agrario Nacional, Guanajuato office, August 27, 2001, personal
communication) through PROCEDE, or Programa de Certificación de Derechos Ejidales y Titulación de
Solares (Program for Certification of Ejido Rights and Homestead Titling). PROCEDE began in late
1992 and by August 2001 had certified and titled 74% of ejidos nationwide. Certification involves
cadastral survey, review of land claims, a public assembly to delimit and assign lands, inscription in the
National Agrarian Registry, and finally issuing certification and titles.
17
indication of ownership of their community asset, Trojes residents took exception to the
As a community, Trojes has access to two ejido tubewells, which in cases of extreme
water scarcity may be used, through special agreement and payment, to complement
surface water supplies. The present study focuses exclusively on the irrigation area and
El Sauz
El Colorado
Trojes de 0 1 2 km
Paul
18
The Trojes water users group is organized somewhat more formally and distinctly
from the ejido than in Nápoles, although a former ejido president serves as the head.
Water management issues are determined separately from the regular ejido meetings, and
cover a range of decisions related to labor mobilization to clear the canals, the start of
to allow tail- and head-end irrigators to alternate first access to water). Users show a
irrigation service fees to be paid to the users group (although these have not yet been
accepted), as well as fines and sanctio ns for over- irrigating (when excess water drains off
the ends of their fields). It is evident that the internal organization of water users in
Trojes, coupled with higher water availability, allows this WHI to pursue an irrigation
Nápoles is located within 40 minutes commuting distance by public transport from the
city of León and 20 minutes from the smaller town of Silao. Several factories pick up
and drop off workers in trucks every day. Residents engage in diverse livelihood
strategies, including off- farm employment and diversified activities within farming.
including conflict over water with a private landowner, and off- farm income
opportunities, both of which contribute to Nápoles’ all-or- nothing water allocation policy.
Water from the adjacent Silao River is diverted by means of a semi-permane nt diversion
structure into an earthen storage reservoir (Figure 3), which dates from the hacienda
19
period. At least two additional water harvesting systems are located in the shared
watershed, and agreements have been devised for inter-community water allocation.
Interviews with local informants indicate that, given its upstream location, Comanjilla
ejido has the right to fill its reservoir first, but that additional runoff is invariably
available from this large mountainous watershed during the rainy season.
Comanjilla
Private Community
reservoir reservoir
Providenci N
a de
Nápoles
0 1 2 km
Silao River
20
Subsequently, the Nápoles water diversion structure takes water from the river down a
and a shared canal that feeds both Nápoles ejido and the private landowner who is a
descendent of the hacendado whose land was distributed to these two ejidos in the
agrarian reforms. Water concessions allocate a share of the water to the landowner
whose small reservoir is just downstream of the ejido reservoir. In fact, the two had been
part of a single, larger reservoir, but were divided by a new embankment with the ejido
part located upstream. It appears that the relatively small size of all of the three storage
structures 10 in relation to the watershed would allow these to be filled in most years;
however, resource mobilization of the labor, materials and capital required for the
During the 1999 study period, Nápoles refused to pass water to the landowner
from their upstream reservoir, alleging that he had not contributed to the past year’s
diversion reconstruction effort. On one of our first visits to start the research for this
collect information that would resolve the dispute. Cautious to observe this process from
a distance, we were able to gain important insights into the ways in which conflict over
Both the ejidatarios and the private landowner have attempted to access other
conjunctive use is limited by an existing state- level ban on drilling new wells, with only
one existing tubewell and one shallow well used by individuals and not available to other
10
Providencia has no storage, but is simply free flow irrigation from the diversion structure.
21
water users. As a result, surface water is in significant demand. While acutely aware of
the ban on new wells, users in both Nápoles and Trojes had not heard of the ban on new
water harvesting systems resulting from the 1991 Lerma-Chapala surface water
agreement.
Nápoles is intimately linked with the ejido structure. Decisions on who will serve as
water arbiters (jueces de agua), water use, labor mobilization and external relations are
made by consensus, normally during the course of regular ejido meetings. Separate
meetings of water users to discuss water management issues may be called; however,
given the relatively small size of the users group and a high degree of absentia from the
irrigation tend to be made informally. On at least one occasion, the ejido president
negotiated and received from the Silao municipal authorities construction materials
intended for housing improvement, but ultimately used to repair the WHI infrastructure.
Disaster relief for the summer 1999 season described below was never received in
Nápoles even though these funds were available from state and federal programs, because
of opposing political parties at the ejido and municipal levels. These are examples of
WHI issues being incorporated into or influenced by ejido management and politics.
individual users determining when to complete irrigating their fields and pass water on to
the next user. All users accept equity of distribution based on land holding, if not
22
equality of distribution to all members, and minimal infighting was detected. Table 2
presents the data on water allocations and actual deliveries for the two systems.
Trojes allocated water per unit land, not per user. The system had water stored
from the 1998 rains and applied its summer irrigation to sorghum at planting time (an
option not available to Nápoles whose reservoir was dry) based on la nd area. By
contrast, irrigation water in Nápoles is allocated based on four- hour rotational turns,
irrespective of flow (which does vary depending on the reservoir level) or of the
ejidatarios’ parcel size. In the 1999 summer season studied, each water user applied the
fixed share of water to whatever area he or she deemed appropriate. In the following
winter season, Nápoles had no water remaining (with the reservoir now serving as the
football field) and was unable to irrigate, while Trojes users were able to irrigate wheat
decided to irrigate their maize and sorghum to supplement rainfall in September 1999.
Nominally, each user was to irrigate 0.5 ha of her or his larger rainfed parcel, although all
agreed that the actual area would depend on parcel- level water management. From the
exceedingly low irrigation depths applied (see Table 2), it is apparent that users
anticipated additional rain. However, rainfall in 1999 was critically low (a total of 411
mm, or 32% lower than average) with the result that the entire grain crop was lost.
Although stover was used as fodder, it is estimated that its financial value (i.e., shadow
price as estimated by replacement value) was lower than the anticipated grain value by a
factor of ten. Such crop failures are not uncommon in Nápoles, with no grain harvest
Comparison of the measured data for both systems in Table 2 confirms that the
strategy articulated by each WHI was followed, with Trojes showing zero variation in
land area irrigated as a portion of total holding in the command area and Nápoles
showing zero variation in the duration of irrigation turns. In Nápoles, a total of eight
users sold their turns (at US$ 2.63 per hour or US$ 10.50 per 4- hour turn, although prices
were negotiated based on the actual storage in the reservoir under the recognition that
flow varied). Additionally, there was significant trading of turns to accommodate off-
1 Trojes 2 Nápoles
Measured (n=9) Reported (n=53) Measured (n=5) Reported (n=51) Nominal (n=51)
A B C D E
Irrig. Duration (hrs/turn)
- Average 36.7 36.4 4 4 4
- St. deviation 16.9 7.1 0 0 0
- Coeff. Variation 0.46 0.20 0 0 0
Land irrigated/total
- Average 1 1 0.60 0.55 0.27
- St. deviation 0 0 0.42 0.28 0.14
- Coeff. Variation 0 0 0.70 0.50 0.52
Land irrigated (ha)
- Average 2.0 2.7 1.7 1.0 0.5
- St. deviation 0.2 2.2 1.5 0.3 0
- Coeff. Variation 0.09 0.82 0.87 0.29 0
Irrigation depth/turn (mm)
- Average 205 206 72 72 156
- St. deviation 44.5 21 26 8 0
- Coeff. Variation 0.22 0.10 0.36 0.12 0
Total number of turns
- Average 4 4 1 1 1
- St. deviation 0 0 0 0 0
- Coeff. Variation 0 0 0 0 0
Note: Measurements of flow, duration and area were made at the parcel level for a limited number of
irrigations (columns A and C; sample size indicated). Reported depth, duration and area (columns
B and D) included all users based on interviews of duration and area, combined with average flow.
Nominal data for Nápoles (column E) are those that would have resulted from the nominally
agreed area of 0.5 ha per 4-hour turn.
Strictly speaking, appropriation of land and water resources was not equitable in
either system with high variations in area irrigated and irrigation depths applied. In
Trojes the variatio n in land irrigated was the result of differences in landholding in the
command area, while for Nápoles, the extremely high variation in measured irrigated area
skewed landholding size in the irrigation command area in Trojes, the irrigation depth
based on reported turns demonstrated low variation (CV=0.10) suggesting that water
deliveries in Trojes follow the area-based water allocation rules quite closely. Trojes was
25
able to provide four satisfactory irrigations and users obtained good yields. By contrast,
the low irrigation depth applied in Nápoles was insufficient to provide for crop water
requirements in the face of deficient rainfall, which coupled with early frosts and low
sorghum prices, left farmers with no option but to abandon their crop as the income
Nápoles faced acute scarcity and followed a high-risk rainfall supplement strategy
of distributing limited irrigation to all users with the result that all grain production was
lost. The relatively high productivity attained in Trojes appears to result from a better
match between water available and land irrigated, although this was not distributed
equally among all users. Table 3 based on our field data presents productivity indicators
Relative water supply (RWS) and relative irrigation supply (RIS) are explanatory
not met (RWS<1), yield can be expected to decrease. RIS simply indicates the portion of
crop demand met by irrigation with the difference attributable to rainfall, e.g., summer
1999. Gross value of production (GVP) by area or water provides a measure of output
(grain) received per unit of resource utilized. Rainfall supplemental irrigation invariably
shows high GVP/m3 and should be interpreted with caution, as the entire production
cannot be attributed to irrigation. The “crop per drop” water productivity is calculated
the volume of water used beneficially by the crop vs. that “lost” to drainage or
percola tion. The GVP/ha and GVP/m3 results for Trojes compare very favorably with
other small farmer- managed irrigation systems and the larger irrigation districts in the
study area (Silva-Ochoa et al. 2000), while the “crop per drop” results indicate good
physical productivity compared with data for similar grains from around the world
social relations, both internal and external to the water users group. The water harvesting
terms of labor and materials. External support for the reservoir was negotiated and
secured from the agriculture and water resources ministry (Secretaría de Agricultura y
effort allowed for the consolidation of a water users organization separate from the ejido.
Given the smaller size of this watershed than Nápoles and the fact that the terrain
is more accessible, Trojes residents have contacts with other communities in their
27
catchment (Las Tinajas, Sauz de Villaseñor, and Colorado de Saavedra). However, inter-
community rules are not articulated for common property management of grazing and
forest resources. Nevertheless, Trojes users are acutely aware of catchment deterioration
been made by Trojes water users to secure government support for sediment removal
from the reservoir. From a preventive perspective, however, Trojes would likely benefit
from including forest and grazing resources in a more integrated management body.
Given the successful functioning of the irrigation users group, based on rules and
action initiatives to include these other resources, particularly to safeguard the reservoir.
At one level of analysis, the strategy of spreading water equally among irrigation
users in Nápoles resulted in the loss of all grain production. However, when viewed in
the context of the ejido facing a set of external challenges to their water source, this
strategy has a different interpretation. Tensions have existed with the private landowner
since the creation of the ejido, resulting in the division of the reservoir. Informants told
us that in 1996, their reservoir was emptied when community members were away on
pilgrimage, with the allegation that the embankment broke, filling the landowner’s
reservoir. This level of resource competition requires community solidarity as has been
achieved through strict adherence to equal water access for all users.
critical to the continued viability of Nápoles’ access to water, and must be mobilized in a
costs of labor. Water users clearly recognize that irrigation can only be supplemental to
28
economic activity than in Trojes (which is both less water scarce, but also importantly,
6. CONCLUSIONS
Recent economic and water resources policy changes in Mexico will have
important consequences for collective action and common property management of small
surface water harvesting irrigation systems that have historically been held in communal
resources including water, while the signing of the North American Free Trade
Agreement has seen prices for basic grains fall. Additionally, increasing water scarcity
and competition at the watershed and river basin levels places further pressure on
traditional water management and allocation systems. In the two case studies presented,
contrasting responses at the community level were apparent. In the first, more
conventional WHI system, water management decision- making distinct from the ejido
structure combined with relative water abundance allowed high water productivity.
Consolidation of the water users group also appeared to raise the possibility of taking on
issues. In the second, more water scarce system, WHI was subsumed under a broader set
of community goals in which sharing water among all members of a group was an
The residual nature of subsistence farming in the context of growing off- farm
labor and capital allocation and increased risk for crop production; in essence, this
wider household economic strategies. In the context of migration and the attendant
in order to receive sufficient allocation of the household labor resources required for its
continued viability. This consideration is apparent to the actual WHI users, many of
whom are women; however, government intervention to support WHI must bear this in
mind. So far, the WHI systems studied have continued to receive low but sustaining
levels of household labor and financial resources. Despite increased urban and non-
Maintaining the sense of community may be an even more important source of livelihood
At the river basin level, WHI systems use water that may have more productive
competition among agriculture, urban, industrial and environmental demands for water.
attention paid to water use by small WHI systems in upstream catchments. WHI will
need to increase the productivity of water in order to continue to receive basin- level
diversification. Several of the external changes discussed may well provide the means to
30
increase water productivity, including off- farm income as a source of investment and
Given the resilience that WHI systems have demonstrated in their evolution, it is
likely that they will adapt to the current set of pressures. However, the significant
challenges posed by falling crop prices, increased dependence on off- farm income
sources, increased interest on the part of basin authorities in WHI water use, and growing
water scarcity indicate that WHI will remain a subsistence activity. As a result, ensuring
productive and equitable benefits to users is critical for their continued viability.
31
REFERENCES
Agarwal, Anil and Sunita Narain, ed. 1997. Dying wisdom: Rise, fall and potential of
India’s traditional water harvesting systems. New Delhi, India: Centre for
Science and Environment.
CNA (Comisión Nacional del Agua). 1999. Diagnóstico regional. Proyecto lineamientos
estratégicos para el desarrollo hidráulico de la Región Lerma-Sant iago-Pacífico.
Comisión Nacional del Agua (CNA). Gerencia Regional Lerma-Santiago-
Pacífico. Guadalajara, Mexico: CNA.
CNA (Comisión Nacional del Agua). 1998. Diagnóstico Preliminar sobre Superficies
Regables y Volúmenes Requeridos en las Unidades de Riego Organizadas y Sin
Organizar. Comisión Nacional del Agua (CNA) and Colegio de Postgraduados
(CP). Montecillo, Mexico: CNA and CP.
De Anda, J., S.E. Quiñones Cisneros, R.H. French, and M. Guzmán. 1998. Hydrologic
balance of Lake Chapala (Mexico). Journal of the American Water Resources
Association. 34(6): 1319-1331.
De Janvry, Alain, Gustavo Gordillo, and Elisabeth Sadoulet. 1997. Mexico’s second
agrarian reform: Household and community responses, 1990-1994. San Diego,
USA: Center for U.S. Mexican Studies, University of California.
Eling, Herbert H. and Martín Sánchez-Rodríguez. 2000. Presas, canales y cajas de agua:
la tecnología hidráulica en El Bajío mexicano. In Antología sobre Pequeño Riego.
32
FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 1996. Crop Water Requirement (CROPWAT)
software. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization.
Hernández, Raúl. 1998. Agua para siempre: obtención de agua y conservación de suelos a
través de la regeneración de cuencas. XX Coloquio de Antropología e Historia
Regionales. Agua, Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo en México, pp. 78-89. Zamora,
Mexico: Colegio de Michoacán, October.
Kloezen, Wim H. 1999. Water markets between Mexican water user associations. Water
Policy 4: 437-455.
Molden, David J. 1997. Accounting for water use and productivity. SWIM Paper 1.
Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Irrigation Management Institute.
Molden, David J., R. Sakthivadivel, Christopher J. Perry, Charlotte de Fraiture, and Wim
H. Kloezen. 1998. Indicators for comparing performance of irrigated agricultural
systems. Research Report 20. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water
Management Institute.
Ostrom, E. 1992. Crafting institutions for self-governing irrigation systems. San
Francisco, CA, US: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press.
Oweis, Theib, Ahmed Hachum and Jacob Kijne. 1999. Water harvesting and
supplemental irrigation for improved water use efficiency in dry areas. SWIM
Report 7. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Water Management Institute.
Place, Frank and Brent Swallow. 2000. Assessing the relationships between property
rights and technology adoption in smallholder agriculture: A review of issues and
33
Scott, Christopher A. 1994. Facing environmental degradation in the Aravalli Hills, India.
In Environmental change in drylands: Biogeographical and geomorphological
perspectives, ed. A.C. Millington and K. Pye. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Seckler, D. 1996. The new era of water resources management. Research Report 1.
Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Irrigation Management Institute.
Snyder, Richard (ed.). 1999. Institutional adaptation and innovation in rural Mexico. San
Diego, USA: Center for U.S. Mexican Studies, University of California.
Van Koppen, Barbara. 1998. More jobs per drop: Targeting irrigation to poor women
and men. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Royal Tropical Institute KIT.
Wade, Robert. 1994. Village republics: Economic conditions for collective action in
South India. San Francisco: Institute of Contemporary Studies Press.
04 Land Tenurial Systems and the Adoption of a Mucuna Planted Fallow in the
Derived Savannas of West Africa, by Victor M. Manyong and Victorin A.
Houndékon, July 2000.
16 The Effects of Scales, Flows, and Filters on Property Rights and Collective Action
in Watershed Management, by Brent M. Swallow, Dennis P. Garrity, and Meine
van Noordwijk, July 2001.